Skip to main content
Erschienen in:

05.01.2022 | Practice

Adoption of a diagnostic certainty scale in abdominal imaging: 2-year experience at an academic institution

verfasst von: Daniel I. Glazer, Elvira Budiawan, Kristine S. Burk, Atul B. Shinagare, Ronilda Lacson, Giles W. Boland, Ramin Khorasani

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 3/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Assess use of a diagnostic certainty scale (CS) for abdominal imaging reports and identify factors associated with greater adoption.

Methods

This retrospective, Institutional Review Board-exempt study was conducted at an academic health system. Abdominal radiology reports containing diagnostic certainty phrases (DCPs) generated 4/1/2019–3/31/2021 were identified by a natural language processing tool. Reports containing DCPs were subdivided into those with/without a CS inserted at the end. Primary outcome was monthly CS use rate in reports containing DCPs. Secondary outcomes were assessment of factors associated with CS use, and usage of recommended DCPs over time. Chi-square test was used to compare proportions; univariable and multivariable regression assessed impact of other variables.

Results

DCPs were used in 81,281/124,501 reports (65.3%). One-month post-implementation, 82/2310 (3.6%) of reports with DCPs contained the CS, increasing to 1862/4644 (40.1%) by study completion (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated reports containing recommended DCPs were more likely to have the CS (Odds Ratio [OR] 4.5; p < 0.001). Using CT as a reference, CS use was lower for ultrasound (OR 0.73; p < 0.001) and X-ray (OR 0.38; p < 0.001). There was substantial inter-radiologist variation in CS use (OR 0.01–26.3, multiple values).

Conclusion

DCPs are very common in abdominal imaging reports and can be further clarified with CS use. Although voluntary CS adoption increased 13-fold over 2 years, > 50% of reports with DCPs lacked the CS at study’s end. More stringent interventions, including embedding the scale in report templates, are likely needed to reduce inter-radiologist variation and decrease ambiguity in conveying diagnostic certainty to referring providers and patients.

Graphical abstract

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Hartung MP, Bickle IC, Gaillard F, Kanne JP (2020) How to Create a Great Radiology Report. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 40:1658–1670 Hartung MP, Bickle IC, Gaillard F, Kanne JP (2020) How to Create a Great Radiology Report. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 40:1658–1670
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Sahni VA, Khorasani R (2016) The actionable imaging report. Abdom Radiol N Y 41:429–443CrossRef Sahni VA, Khorasani R (2016) The actionable imaging report. Abdom Radiol N Y 41:429–443CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Lacson R, Odigie E, Wang A, Kapoor N, Shinagare A, Boland G, Khorasani R (2019) Multivariate Analysis of Radiologists’ Usage of Phrases that Convey Diagnostic Certainty. Acad Radiol 26:1229–1234CrossRef Lacson R, Odigie E, Wang A, Kapoor N, Shinagare A, Boland G, Khorasani R (2019) Multivariate Analysis of Radiologists’ Usage of Phrases that Convey Diagnostic Certainty. Acad Radiol 26:1229–1234CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Shinagare AB, Lacson R, Boland GW, Wang A, Silverman SG, Mayo-Smith WW, Khorasani R (2019) Radiologist Preferences, Agreement, and Variability in Phrases Used to Convey Diagnostic Certainty in Radiology Reports. J Am Coll Radiol JACR 16:458–464CrossRef Shinagare AB, Lacson R, Boland GW, Wang A, Silverman SG, Mayo-Smith WW, Khorasani R (2019) Radiologist Preferences, Agreement, and Variability in Phrases Used to Convey Diagnostic Certainty in Radiology Reports. J Am Coll Radiol JACR 16:458–464CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Mityul MI, Gilcrease-Garcia B, Searleman A, Demertzis JL, Gunn AJ (2018) Interpretive Differences Between Patients and Radiologists Regarding the Diagnostic Confidence Associated With Commonly Used Phrases in the Radiology Report. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:123–126CrossRef Mityul MI, Gilcrease-Garcia B, Searleman A, Demertzis JL, Gunn AJ (2018) Interpretive Differences Between Patients and Radiologists Regarding the Diagnostic Confidence Associated With Commonly Used Phrases in the Radiology Report. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:123–126CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Gunn AJ, Tuttle MC, Flores EJ, Mangano MD, Bennett SE, Sahani DV, Choy G, Boland GW (2016) Differing Interpretations of Report Terminology Between Primary Care Physicians and Radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol JACR 13:1525-1529.e1CrossRef Gunn AJ, Tuttle MC, Flores EJ, Mangano MD, Bennett SE, Sahani DV, Choy G, Boland GW (2016) Differing Interpretations of Report Terminology Between Primary Care Physicians and Radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol JACR 13:1525-1529.e1CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Swensen SJ, Johnson CD (2005) Radiologic Quality and Safety: Mapping Value Into Radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 2:992–1000CrossRef Swensen SJ, Johnson CD (2005) Radiologic Quality and Safety: Mapping Value Into Radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 2:992–1000CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Eberhardt SC, Heilbrun ME (2018) Radiology Report Value Equation. RadioGraphics 38:1888–1896CrossRef Eberhardt SC, Heilbrun ME (2018) Radiology Report Value Equation. RadioGraphics 38:1888–1896CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Panicek DM, Hricak H (2016) How Sure Are You, Doctor? A Standardized Lexicon to Describe the Radiologist’s Level of Certainty. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:2–3CrossRef Panicek DM, Hricak H (2016) How Sure Are You, Doctor? A Standardized Lexicon to Describe the Radiologist’s Level of Certainty. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:2–3CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Das JP, Panicek DM (2021) Added Value of a Diagnostic Certainty Lexicon to the Radiology Report. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 41:E64–E65 Das JP, Panicek DM (2021) Added Value of a Diagnostic Certainty Lexicon to the Radiology Report. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 41:E64–E65
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Wibmer A, Vargas HA, Sosa R, Zheng J, Moskowitz C, Hricak H (2014) Value of a standardized lexicon for reporting levels of diagnostic certainty in prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:W651-657CrossRef Wibmer A, Vargas HA, Sosa R, Zheng J, Moskowitz C, Hricak H (2014) Value of a standardized lexicon for reporting levels of diagnostic certainty in prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:W651-657CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Shinagare AB, Alper DP, Hashemi SR, Chai JL, Hammer MM, Boland GW, Khorasani R (2020) Early adoption of a certainty scale to improve diagnostic certainty communication. J Am Coll Radiol 17:1276–1284CrossRef Shinagare AB, Alper DP, Hashemi SR, Chai JL, Hammer MM, Boland GW, Khorasani R (2020) Early adoption of a certainty scale to improve diagnostic certainty communication. J Am Coll Radiol 17:1276–1284CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Adoption of a diagnostic certainty scale in abdominal imaging: 2-year experience at an academic institution
verfasst von
Daniel I. Glazer
Elvira Budiawan
Kristine S. Burk
Atul B. Shinagare
Ronilda Lacson
Giles W. Boland
Ramin Khorasani
Publikationsdatum
05.01.2022
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 3/2022
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03391-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

KI-gestütztes Mammografiescreening überzeugt im Praxistest

Mit dem Einsatz künstlicher Intelligenz lässt sich die Detektionsrate im Mammografiescreening offenbar deutlich steigern. Mehr unnötige Zusatzuntersuchungen sind laut der Studie aus Deutschland nicht zu befürchten.

Stumme Schlaganfälle − ein häufiger Nebenbefund im Kopf-CT?

In 4% der in der Notfallambulanz initiierten zerebralen Bildgebung sind „alte“ Schlaganfälle zu erkennen. Gar nicht so selten handelt es sich laut einer aktuellen Studie dabei um unbemerkte Insulte. Bietet sich hier womöglich die Chance auf ein effektives opportunistisches Screening?

Die elektronische Patientenakte kommt: Das sollten Sie jetzt wissen

Am 15. Januar geht die „ePA für alle“ zunächst in den Modellregionen an den Start. Doch schon bald soll sie in allen Praxen zum Einsatz kommen. Was ist jetzt zu tun? Was müssen Sie wissen? Wir geben in einem FAQ Antworten auf 21 Fragen.

Stören weiße Wände und viel Licht die Bildqualitätskontrolle?

Wenn es darum geht, die technische Qualität eines Mammogramms zu beurteilen, könnten graue Wandfarbe und reduzierte Beleuchtung im Bildgebungsraum von Vorteil sein. Darauf deuten zumindest Ergebnisse einer kleinen Studie hin. 

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.